| Author | Thread |
|
|
04/22/2009 02:11:34 PM · #1 |
I'm probably imagining things, but I seem to get a few low scores very early in the voting which then takes days to recover. Does anyone else feel the same?
Why would that be so? |
|
|
|
04/22/2009 02:18:48 PM · #2 |
I usually see the opposite. My scores typically start out much higher in the first few votes than they end up.
Some explanations for what you see:
The first few voters:
1. don't like your shot very much
2. vote everyone low just to cause trouble in the scores thread and then
a. change their scores later
b. have their scores scrubbed at rollover
3. are drunk and confused
|
|
|
|
04/22/2009 02:22:11 PM · #3 |
Originally posted by freakin_hilarious:
I usually see the opposite. My scores typically start out much higher in the first few votes than they end up. |
Ditto. Almost without exception.
R. |
|
|
|
04/22/2009 02:24:56 PM · #4 |
| Looks like the early votes just think my shots are rubbish - I can live with that |
|
|
|
04/22/2009 02:25:05 PM · #5 |
We have to admit, there are people who vote unfairly, some vote very low for images that stand a chance to compete with his/hers, and vote very high for average pictures to bring up the overall voting percentage.
It is really disappointing!
I̢۪ve started a challenge with 7.3, jumped up to 7.5 then now struggling to keep above 6.
For me the honest indicator of the vote is the commenter, what is the average commenter for a picture.
When I get an average commenter of 8, and the overall score is below 6, then there is something wrong.
|
|
|
|
04/22/2009 02:34:15 PM · #6 |
I find the same thing in many cases, I've seen myself climb just about a full point once and now again with the Candid Challenge. I've already climbed .6 and it's only Wednesday afternoon.
|
|
|
|
04/22/2009 02:42:18 PM · #7 |
The typical pattern:
1. Denial. The first few votes are wild. A good photo might start with an average of 3, and a bad one could be an 8.
2. Anger. The next 50 or so votes will give a rough indication of how well your photo is being received. If you started off high, the score has likely jumped off a cliff. If it started low, you're upset that the voters failed to acknowledge your genius.
3. Bargaining. Scores bottom out the evening after rollover, and tend to moderate after that. This is approximately when people are most actively making their cases for trolls, buddy voting or what meets the challenge in the scores thread. They seek agreement to be open minded and blast anyone unwilling to compromise. Extra credit for complaining to SC about a comment.
4. Depression. After 100 votes in a "typical" challenge, any additional votes have less impact and your score settles in a little shy of the final average. If your score is over 5, you're upset that it's not over 6, and if it's over 6, you're upset that it's not a 7, etc.
5. Acceptance: Rollover is good for a 0.1-0.3 boost on a good photo as trolls and people who didn't vote 20% are knocked out of the average. You claim shock that that the entry did so well or resign yourself to a lousy placement.
Message edited by author 2009-04-22 14:42:52. |
|
|
|
04/22/2009 02:44:38 PM · #8 |
Originally posted by drewhosick:
I find the same thing in many cases, I've seen myself climb just about a full point once and now again with the Candid Challenge. I've already climbed .6 and it's only Wednesday afternoon. |
Interesting !
Usually about 1 point difference between overall and commenters but jumped to 2.2 for flora |
|
|
|
04/22/2009 02:49:30 PM · #9 |
If I start out high it drops, if I start out low, it *usually* climbs. I think whoever the early voters normally are, they prefer to dish out greater reward or punishment on the entries. Only the site logs would reveal who it is.
I also do believe there are a small handful of "trolls", who enjoy dishing out low votes to frustrate people. I think the problem is greater in the open challenges.
I'm in the denial stage.
Message edited by author 2009-04-22 14:51:37. |
|
|
|
04/22/2009 03:03:41 PM · #10 |
Originally posted by Yo_Spiff:
I also do believe there are a small handful of "trolls", who enjoy dishing out low votes to frustrate people. \ |
My favorite is the "rollover one" voter. This miscreant will vote every entry in a challenge one in the first hour of voting. Later they change them or they are scrubbed. I got so mad the first time I could have killed the misanthrope. But then I realized how silly it is to push an imaginary button all week long like a kid waiting for Christmas. So I disabled the update button and concentrate on something more important. Like porn. |
|
|
|
04/22/2009 04:23:41 PM · #11 |
Originally posted by FireBird:
concentrate on something more important. Like porn. |
Now there's a challenge idea that hasn't been done yet. At least not as it's own theme. |
|
|
|
04/22/2009 05:21:14 PM · #12 |
| I agree to the fact that the first few voters always seem to give very low scores ... |
|
|
|
04/22/2009 05:39:26 PM · #13 |
Originally posted by AmeedEl-Ghoul:
We have to admit, there are people who vote unfairly, some vote very low for images that stand a chance to compete with his/hers, and vote very high for average pictures to bring up the overall voting percentage.
It is really disappointing!
I̢۪ve started a challenge with 7.3, jumped up to 7.5 then now struggling to keep above 6.
For me the honest indicator of the vote is the commenter, what is the average commenter for a picture.
When I get an average commenter of 8, and the overall score is below 6, then there is something wrong. |
I disagree that an honest indicator is the Average Commentor Vote. Most of the time, this vote is higher, as people that give a few comments will comment on the shots they like. People who are giving you average votes (say a 5) will not bother to comment, yet they are not a troll. To dismiss the overall average vote like that because of a very small number of people is kidding yourself, and trying to pretend your photo is better than it really is. At the end of the day, the 'troll' voters are a very small number, and although it is ovbious in the early votes, it have little effect on the overall result. |
|
|
|
04/22/2009 07:41:03 PM · #14 |
Originally posted by FireBird:
My favorite is the "rollover one" voter. This miscreant will vote every entry in a challenge one in the first hour of voting. Later they change them or they are scrubbed. ... |
DO bear in mind that it is entirely possible that a user votes first to categorize, then comes back to adjust. Not saying that explains spurious low votes, but it well could explain some that are changed later. Also, FWIW, you can't have any direct evidence that specific votes are changed, it's not possible to know. Even SC has limitations as to what they can dig out, especially after the fact. |
|
|
|
04/22/2009 07:45:46 PM · #15 |
Also bear in mind that if you have an image that will ultimately score a 6.0, there is better than a one in seven chance that your first vote will be a four *or below*. Conversely, there is less than a 1 in 20 chance that your first vote will be an eight or above.
ETA:
Now, with all that said, I *have* observed that there appears to be a dip in scores early on particularly for the Member Challenges. May have something to do with Mondays ;-)
Message edited by author 2009-04-22 19:48:01. |
|
|
|
04/22/2009 08:14:09 PM · #16 |
Originally posted by kirbic:
Now, with all that said, I *have* observed that there appears to be a dip in scores early on particularly for the Member Challenges. May have something to do with Mondays ;-) |
Makes sense. |
|
|
|
04/22/2009 08:17:00 PM · #17 |
My first pass thru voting is to identify those images I like, so I typically give them a 6, maybe higher. But then I go back thru those once, twice, or even more times than that to expand the scale upward on the votes.
I know that some others do the same, so that explains why sometimes the average vote value changes when the number of votes remains the same.
I have to agree that Scores by Commenters is not an "honest" indicator--most commenters are commenting on images they like, so the scores they give will be biased in that direction by definition.
In the end, the scores don't tell you as much about your image or the voters as you might think. Scores do, to some degree, tell you how well you, your image, "connected" with the viewers/voters, but even that is not solid. There are so many varying standards of voting and voters here that getting hung up on scores should be for FUN and not for measure of merit or value.
I find it humorous (and a little sad) when people post that "fair-minded" or "right-thinking" voters give them good scores...
For me, the value of entering a challenge is primarily in the participation, the comments received, and any "connections" with viewers that may be made via an image. A comment is actual information, good or bad, use it or not.
A low vote can be because the voter dislikes your subject matter, your processing, your composition, your title, your border--who knows? A high vote can be for similar things--they love any picture of a (woodie, ducky, cat, puppy, flower, water drop) or they find that your is the best photo of a (woodie, ducky, cat, puppy, flower, water drop) they have ever seen! Again, you don't know.
The score is a generalized metric of how your image is received by the subset of the DPC membership that voted in that particular challenge. It is not a metric of the absolute quality of the image itself (define that if you even can), nor is it any assurance that the image will be received similarly outside DPC. (ref: the 1x thread).
I click the [Update] button as often as most folks, for sure. I like it when my score goes up, not so much when it goes down. But I LOVE it when I see a new comment has been made, and I eagerly click on that link to see what someone said!
One other benefit of the higher scores is this: more viewers after the challenge is over! On those rare occasions when I have placed well in a challenge, I get orders of magnitude more post challenge views (and some more comments, too).
Message edited by author 2009-04-22 20:18:48. |
|
|
|
04/22/2009 08:31:01 PM · #18 |
Originally posted by kirbic:
Also, FWIW, you can't have any direct evidence that specific votes are changed, |
Sure I can. The challenge in question I ended with NO ONE VOTES. At 10 minutes past midnight when voting started my ONLY VOTE was ONE! I wasn't the only one hit either. That's what helped me to realize watching the accumulation of DPC votes is much akin to reading coffee grinds and not worthy of my time. |
|
|
|
04/22/2009 09:11:39 PM · #19 |
Originally posted by FireBird:
Originally posted by kirbic:
Also, FWIW, you can't have any direct evidence that specific votes are changed, |
Sure I can. The challenge in question I ended with NO ONE VOTES. At 10 minutes past midnight when voting started my ONLY VOTE was ONE! I wasn't the only one hit either. That's what helped me to realize watching the accumulation of DPC votes is much akin to reading coffee grinds and not worthy of my time. |
You are correct in this instance... if you happen to know the very first vote you got, and you have none of those at challenge end, then obviously it was changed. You still don't know what it was changed to, nor the thought process behind the initial vote or the change.
My point is, labeling an early one-voter as a "miscreant" is a knee-jerk reaction, and not supportable by data. |
|
|
|
04/22/2009 10:08:15 PM · #20 |
Originally posted by kirbic:
You are correct in this instance... if you happen to know the very first vote you got, and you have none of those at challenge end, then obviously it was changed. You still don't know what it was changed to, nor the thought process behind the initial vote or the change.
My point is, labeling an early one-voter as a "miscreant" is a knee-jerk reaction, and not supportable by data. |
In addition there were the comments of MANY peeps during that challenge about this. I wasn't the only one hit. So IMO, with my data and comments from a number of others, the rollover one bandit did exist.
I'm happy that he had a wise counselor like yourself to defend him. LOL |
|
|
|
04/22/2009 11:43:47 PM · #21 |
Originally posted by kirbic:
Originally posted by FireBird:
Originally posted by kirbic:
Also, FWIW, you can't have any direct evidence that specific votes are changed, |
Sure I can. The challenge in question I ended with NO ONE VOTES. At 10 minutes past midnight when voting started my ONLY VOTE was ONE! I wasn't the only one hit either. That's what helped me to realize watching the accumulation of DPC votes is much akin to reading coffee grinds and not worthy of my time. |
You are correct in this instance... if you happen to know the very first vote you got, and you have none of those at challenge end, then obviously it was changed. You still don't know what it was changed to, nor the thought process behind the initial vote or the change.
My point is, labeling an early one-voter as a "miscreant" is a knee-jerk reaction, and not supportable by data. |
Changed, or scrubbed. Don't forget that dear scrubber!
My experience is usually decent votes for most of the first handful then a major drop overnight, followed by a painful climb halfway back up. |
|
Home -
Challenges -
Community -
League -
Photos -
Cameras -
Lenses -
Learn -
Help -
Terms of Use -
Privacy -
Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2025 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 08/02/2025 09:44:21 AM EDT.
